Skip to main content
Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz logoLink to Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz
. 2026 Oct 12;121:e250333. doi: 10.1590/0074-02760250333

Nanoemulsions loaded with ß-caryophyllene and resveratrol for herpes infections

Isabella Dai Prá 1,2, Douglas Santos Porto 1, Bianca Costa Bernardo Port 1, Luíse Gauer Schulte 1,2, Débora Fretes Argenta 1, Thiago Caon 1, Izabella Thaís Silva 1,2,+
PMCID: PMC13660975  PMID: 42879615

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) infection represents a global health concern with a significant impact on affected individuals’ quality of life. Conventional treatment relies on nucleoside analogues such as acyclovir, which, although effective, have limitations including viral resistance and low bioavailability. In this context, natural products such as resveratrol (RSV) and β-caryophyllene (BCP) emerge as promising alternatives due to their antiviral and immunomodulatory properties. However, these compounds present challenges related to stability and solubility, necessitating the use of controlled drug delivery systems such as nanoemulsions.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to develop and characterise nanoemulsions containing RSV and BCP, either individually or in combination, for the treatment of HSV type 1 (HSV-1) infections.

METHODS

The nanoemulsions were prepared using a low-energy spontaneous emulsification technique and characterised for particle size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential. The antiviral activity, cytotoxicity, and wound-healing potential of the nanoemulsions were evaluated in vitro using VERO and human gingival fibroblast (HGF) cells.

FINDINGS

Results showed that RSV exhibited significant antiviral activity against HSV-1, while BCP demonstrated moderate activity. Nanoencapsulation improved the biocompatibility of RSV but increased the cytotoxicity of BCP. The combination of RSV and BCP in nanoemulsions showed enhanced antiviral activity, with inhibition percentages above 70%. However, the nanoemulsions did not significantly promote wound healing in HGF cells. Additionally, the nanoemulsions did not protect against Ultraviolet Crosslinker (UVC)-induced cell damage.

MAIN CONCLUSIONS

Nanoemulsions containing RSV and BCP demonstrated enhanced antiviral activity against HSV-1, particularly when combined, suggesting a synergistic effect between both compounds. Nanoencapsulation improved the biocompatibility of RSV but increased the cytotoxicity of BCP. Although no significant effects were observed in wound healing or UV protection assays, the results support nanoemulsions as a promising platform for improving the antiviral performance of these compounds for topical HSV-1 treatment.

Key words: antiviral activity, herpes treatment, drug delivery systems, nanoencapsulation


The Herpes Simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) is highly transmissible human pathogen, affecting approximately 3.7 billion individuals under 50 years worldwide. 1 HSV-1 initially infects epithelial cells and establishes latency in the neurons of the trigeminal ganglion. 2 Factors such as stress, sunlight exposure, and immunosuppression can trigger viral reactivation, leading to the appearance of characteristic mucocutaneous lesions in the orofacial region. 3 Exposure to UV radiation, in addition to being one of the main triggers for HSV-1 reactivation, can exacerbate skin lesions, resulting in slower healing and a higher likelihood of complications, such as secondary infections. The mucocutaneous lesions, typical of HSV-1 infection, primarily affect the orofacial region but can extend to other areas of the skin and mucous membranes. In more severe cases, HSV-1 can lead to complications such as encephalitis. 4 , 5 , 6

HSV infections are treated primarily with nucleoside analogues such as acyclovir, valacyclovir, and famciclovir, which suppress viral replication but do not eliminate latent infection. Long-term suppressive therapy, recommended for patients with frequent recurrences (≥ 6 episodes/year) and for immunocompromised individuals, is associated with the emergence of drug-resistant strains, which have been reported in up to 5% of immunocompetent patients and in up to 30% of immunocompromised individuals, such as those with human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) or transplant recipients. 7 , 8 This scenario reinforces the urgent need for new antiviral strategies with alternative mechanisms of action. The need for new antiviral therapies against HSV has been explicitly recognised by the World Health Organization (WHO). 1 In this context, a diversity of plant-based compounds has been investigated as potential anti-herpetic agents, as they frequently exhibit favourable tolerability profiles and may offer complementary or alternative mechanisms of action to conventional antivirals. 9 , 10 , 11 , 11

Resveratrol (RSV), a polyphenol found in grapes, berries and peanuts, has already been shown to be active against HSV-1. It is thought to act on the ICP-4 viral protein, resulting in a reduction in replication and viral load. Furthermore, the reactivation of latent virus in neuronal cells is prevented as the cell cycle is delayed. 12 , 13

β-caryophyllene (BCP), a bicyclic sesquiterpene found in Eugenia caryophyllata, Piper nigrum, Zingiber nimmonii, Copaifera reticulata and Cannabis spp., has shown promising potential in the treatment of viral infections. 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 BCP seems to affect the structure of the virion envelope of HSV-1, which is essential for adsorption or entry into the host cells. 18

Both natural compounds have demonstrated anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and wound healing properties that may be beneficial in herpes treatment. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 In addition to contributing to the control of inflammation associated with infection, their ability to support tissue repair may accelerate the recovery of virus-induced lesions, reduce the aesthetic and functional impact of skin damage, and help prevent complications, particularly in areas exposed to UV radiation. 23

Nanoemulsions are colloidal dispersions composed of two immiscible phases, typically oil and water, stabilised by surfactants and co-surfactants, with droplet sizes generally ranging from 10 to 200 nm. Their nanometric size confers unique properties, including a large interfacial surface area and enhanced kinetic stability, which contribute to improved solubility, bioavailability, and controlled release of encapsulated bioactive compounds. 24 These characteristics make nanoemulsions particularly suitable for the delivery of lipophilic natural compounds.

In this context, nanoencapsulation represents a promising strategy for compounds such as BCP and RSV, which present important pharmaceutical limitations. BCP is highly susceptible to air oxidation, leading to the formation of caryophyllene oxide, a less biologically active derivative, while its volatility further reduces therapeutic efficacy during storage. 25 , 26 RSV, in turn, suffers from poor aqueous solubility, photoisomerisation from the active trans- to the inactive cis-form, and extensive first-pass metabolism, which severely limit its bioavailability. 27 Nanoemulsions prepared by low-energy methods, such as spontaneous emulsification, provide a protective lipid environment that minimises degradation while enhancing interaction with biological membranes and facilitating cellular uptake. 24 , 28 Therefore, nanoemulsions emerge as a rational strategy to improve the therapeutic performance of RSV and BCP.

Considering the variety of pharmacological activities described above and the already known safety profile of these compounds, the hypothesis of this study was to investigate whether both could act synergistically against HSV. Additionally, this study aimed to evaluate whether nanoencapsulation of these active compounds could improve their anti-herpetic activity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Materials - BCP, RSV and Tween 80 were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St Louis, MO, USA). Medium-chain triglycerides (MCT; caprylic/capric triglycerides) were obtained from Croda (São Paulo, Brazil). Phosal® 50 SA+, which is composed of more than 50% phosphatidylcholine in safflower seed oil, was donated by Lipoid (Ludwigshafen, Germany). Ethanol was obtained from Vetec Química Fina Ltda (Duque de Caxias, Brazil), and ultrapure water was obtained from a Milli-Q® purification system. For biological activity assays, RSV and BCP were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO; Merck).

Green monkey kidney fibroblasts (VERO - ATCC: CCL81) were grown in Eagle’s minimum essential medium (MEM; Gibco) and supplemented with 10% foetal bovine serum (FBS; Gibco, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA). Human gingival fibroblasts (HGF) were obtained by primary culture from three healthy patients who needed distal wedge procedures. The tissue removal protocol was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee (CEPSH) at the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), under authorisation number 062, protocol number 21/09. The HGF cell line was cultured in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium (DMEM; Gibco, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA) with 10% FBS (Gibco, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, USA).

HSV-1 (KOS strain) stocks were donated from the Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Rennes, France. Viral titre was calculated as plaque-forming units (PFU). 29

Nanoemulsion preparation - Nanoemulsions were prepared by using the spontaneous emulsification technique, a low-energy method, according to Singh et al., 30 and the formulation was based on Santos Porto et al., 26 with some modifications. The organic phase was composed of 0.5 g of BCP and/or 0.002 g of RSV, 0.25 g of medium-chain triglycerides (MTC), and 0.5 g of Phosal® (PHO) in 25 mL of ethanol. For the aqueous phase, 0.1 g of Tween® 80 was solubilised in 50 mL of Milli-Q water. A detailed composition of each formulation is presented in the Table I. The organic phase was slowly added to the aqueous phase using a syringe at room temperature. Finally, the organic solvent and excess water were removed under reduced pressure at 215 rpm and 32ºC, resulting in a final formulation volume of 10 mL.

TABLE I. Composition (%, w/w) of nanoemulsions with and without resveratrol (RSV) and β-caryophyllene (BCP).

Components NE blank NE BCP NE RSV NE BCP+RSV
BCP - 5.0% - 5.0%
RSV - - 0.02% 0.02%
MCT 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5%
PHO 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Ethanol 25 mL 25 mL 25 mL 25 mL
Tween® 80 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
Water 50 mL 50 mL 50 mL 50 mL

NE RSV: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol; NE BCP: nanoemulsion containing β-caryophyllene; NE RSV+BCP: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol and β-caryophyllene; NE blank: control nanoemulsion containing only excipients, without test compounds.

Formulation characterisation: determination of particle size, polydispersity index, and surface charge - Particle size and polydispersity index (PDI) were analysed using photon correlation spectroscopy at 25ºC with a laser beam angle of 90º. Zeta potential was determined through electrophoretic mobility measurements. All analyses were performed in triplicate using a Malvern Zetasizer Nano-ZS 90 instrument (Malvern Instruments, Malvern, UK). Colloidal suspensions were diluted in ultrapure water at a 1:10 (v/v) ratio for the measurements.

Stability study: long-term stability - For long-term stability tests, NEs were stored under refrigeration (4 ± 2ºC) and protected from light. During these conditions, measurements of particle size, polydispersity index and zeta potential were carried out after 0, 15, 30, 60, and 90 days of storage. All samples were analysed in triplicate and results were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD).

Antiviral activity: in vitro cytotoxicity assay - The cytotoxicity assay was carried out using the sulforhodamine B colorimetric assay. 31 Briefly, 96-well plates previously prepared with VERO cell suspensions, at a density of 2.5x104 cells/well, were cultured in MEM medium, supplemented with 10% FBS, and maintained at 37ºC in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2 for 24 h. After 24 h, 100 μL of test materials, at different concentrations, was added to each well and plates were incubated for a further 48 h under culture conditions. RSV was tested at concentrations from 0.03 to 15.62 µM, BCP from 7.45 to 3812.5 µM, and the RSV+BCP combination was tested at the same concentrations in a fixed ratio (1:244). After the treatment time, the cells were fixed by adding a 10% (w/v) TCA aqueous solution, and the plate was incubated for 1 h at 4ºC. Subsequently, the fixed cells were stained with 100 μL of the acidic sulforhodamine B solution (0.057% w/v) for 30 min and the dye bound to the proteins was extracted with the addition of a 10 mM Tris Base buffer solution (pH 10.5). Finally, the absorbance values were measured in a spectrophotometer (Spectra MD2, Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) at 510 nm. All assays were performed in triplicate. The 50% cytotoxic concentration (CC50), which represents the concentration of test compound required to reduce cell viability by 50%, was calculated by nonlinear regression analysis.

Viral plaque number reduction assay - VERO cells (2.5 x 105/well) were growth in MEM supplemented with 10% FBS in 24-well plates under culture conditions (37ºC and 5% CO2). After 24 h, the medium was aspirated, and the cell monolayer was infected with 400 μL of viral suspension (100 PFU/well). After 1 h of adsorption at 37ºC and 5% CO2, 500 μL of MEM containing 1.5% carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), with or without different concentrations of the samples or acyclovir 5 µM (positive control) was added. The plates were incubated for 48 h at 37ºC and 5% CO2. After incubation, the cells were stained with a naphthol blue-black solution for 20 min at room temperature under agitation, and the plaques were counted using a stereoscopic microscope. The percentage of viral replication inhibition for each sample relative to viral controls was calculated and plotted on a graph. IC50 values were determined through nonlinear regression analysis, representing the average of three independent experiments.

Wound-healing assay and UV protection capacity: cytotoxicity assay - The cytotoxicity of NE RSV, NE BCP, and NE RSV+BCP was assessed using the MTT colorimetric assay. 32 Briefly, 96-well plates were seeded with HGF cell suspensions at a density of 1 × 10⁴ cells/well. The cells were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS and maintained at 37ºC in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO₂ for 24 h. After the initial incubation period, 100 µL of the test materials, at varying concentrations, was added to each well, and the plates were incubated for an additional 48 h under the same culture conditions.

NE RSV was tested at concentrations ranging from 0.03 to 15.62 µM, NE BCP from 7.45 to 3812.5 µM, and the NE RSV+BCP combination was tested at the same concentrations in a fixed ratio (1:244). The NE Blank was tested at the same dilutions and volumes as the NE RSV+BCP. Following the treatment period, the supernatant was removed, and 100 µL of a 1 mg/mL MTT solution in DMEM was added to each well. The plates were then incubated for 4 h at 37ºC. Subsequently, 100 µL of DMSO was added to dissolve the formazan crystals, and the absorbance was measured using a spectrophotometer (Spectra MD2, Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) at a wavelength of 540 nm. All experiments were performed in triplicate.

The 50% cytotoxic concentration (CC₅₀), defined as the concentration of the test material required to reduce cell viability by 50%, was determined using nonlinear regression analysis.

Scratch assay - Cell migration and proliferation activity was evaluated using a cell migration assay (scratch assay), as described by Suarez-Arnedo et al. 33 Initially, HGF cells (2.5 × 10⁵ cells/well) were cultured in 12-well plates and incubated at 37ºC and 5% CO₂ for 24 h until reaching confluence. After the formation of the cell monolayer, a linear artificial wound was created using the tip of a sterile micropipette. Subsequently, samples at different concentrations were added to the cells and incubated at 37ºC and 5% CO₂. Representative images of the wounded areas were captured at 0, 24, and 48 h to estimate relative cell migration. Image analysis was performed using ImageJ software. The percentage of wound closure at each experimental time point was calculated according to the following equation:

Wound closure %=Initial wound area-wound area after “n” hoursInitial wound areax 100%

All assays were performed in triplicate, and the data were expressed as the mean of three independent experiments with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Ultraviolet Crosslinker (UVC) irradiation and drug administration - HGF cells were seeded in 12-well plates at a density of 2 x 10⁵ cells/well and incubated for 24 h. After this period, the culture medium was removed and replaced with fresh medium containing varying concentrations of NE RSV, NE BCP, RSV, and BCP. The cells were then treated for 2 h or simultaneously exposed to UVC radiation. Irradiation was performed using the UVC 500 Ultraviolet Crosslinker (Hoefer, USA) at a dose of 50 mJ/cm² for 30 min. Subsequently, cell viability was assessed using the MTT assay, as described in Section 2.6.1. The control group was subjected to the same experimental conditions but without UVC radiation exposure.

Statistical analysis - Data are presented as mean ± SD from three independent experiments. CC₅₀ and IC₅₀ values were estimated by nonlinear regression of concentration-response curves using GraphPad Prism 8 software (GraphPad, Boston, USA).

RESULTS

Nanoemulsion characterisation - Regardless of the composition, the colloidal systems showed a reduced particle size and a homogeneous size distribution, as PDI values close to 0.2 were found. A negative surface charge was found for the particles, which can be associated with free fatty acids or lipids from the MCT or Phosal®. The presence of BCP was shown to affect this parameter, reducing the charge density (Table II).

TABLE II. Size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential of nanoemulsions. Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD) (n = 3).

Formulation Size (nm) PDI Zeta potential (mV)
NE RSV 217.4 ± 7.48 0.187 ± 0.015 -18.60 ± 3.25
NE BCP 205.1 ± 5.32 0.187 ± 0.014 -9.31 ± 0.51
NE RSV+BCP 205.4 ± 8.89 0.201 ± 0.006 -11.41 ± 3.53
NE Blank 196.4 ± 12.82 0.185 ± 0.013 -19.70 ± 3.37

NE RSV: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol; NE BCP: nanoemulsion containing β-caryophyllene; NE RSV+BCP: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol and β-caryophyllene; NE blank: control nanoemulsion containing only excipients, without test compounds.

Stability studies - The stability of the nanoemulsions was monitored for up to 90 days after preparation. Size, zeta potential and PDI remained stable during this period (Fig. 1). No microbial growth was macroscopically observed (data not shown).

Fig. 1: particle size, zeta potential, and polydispersity index (PDI) of nanoemulsions stored at 4 ± 2ºC for 90 days (n = 3).

Fig. 1:

Antiviral activity - The cytotoxicity results of free compounds and nanoemulsions are summarised in Table III.

TABLE III. Cytotoxicity of free compounds and nanoemulsions in VERO cells determined by the sulforhodamine B assay.

Samples CC50 (μM)
RSV > 15.00
BCP 1423.00 ± 256.9
RSV+BCP 4.24 ± 0.66 RSV+1034.00 ± 160.0 BCP
NE RSV > 15.00
NE BCP 365.1 ± 12.1
NE RSV+BCP 17.53 ± 2.2 RSV+4277.00 ± 537.3 BCP

RSV: resveratrol; BCP: β-caryophyllene; NE RSV: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol; NE BCP: nanoemulsion containing β-caryophyllene; NE RSV+BCP: nanoemulsion containing both compounds. CC₅₀ represents the concentration required to reduce cell viability by 50%. Values are expressed in µM and represent the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three independent experiments (n = 3). These results were used to guide the selection of non-cytotoxic concentrations for subsequent antiviral assays.

RSV did not exhibit cytotoxicity at the evaluated concentrations (0.03-15.63 µM), as cell viability values remained above 75%. Its incorporation into nanoemulsions improved biocompatibility, resulting in cell viability percentages close to 100%. In contrast, BCP showed the opposite effect. Nanoencapsulation increased its toxicity, with a significant reduction in CC₅₀ values, from 1423 µM for free BCP to 365.1 µM for NE BCP. An inverse trend was observed for the combination of active ingredients. The RSV+BCP system exhibited CC₅₀ values of 4.24 µM for RSV and 1034 µM for BCP, whereas, after the preparation of the RSV+BCP NE, the CC₅₀ value increased to 17.53 µM for RSV and 4277 µM for BCP, indicating a reduction in cytotoxicity. The blank formulation (without active compounds) did not exhibit cytotoxicity.

In antiviral activity assays with isolated compounds (Fig. 2), RSV demonstrated greater potency than BCP. Indeed, lower concentrations of RSV were required to achieve an inhibitory effect against HSV-1. At non-cytotoxic concentrations (up to 1423 µM for BCP), the combination of RSV and BCP did not result in enhanced anti-herpetic activity compared to assays performed with the isolated compounds. At 953 µM, BCP was more active than RSV; however, this result should be interpreted with caution, as BCP exhibited some toxicity at these concentrations.

Fig. 2: effect of resveratrol (RSV), β-caryophyllene (BCP), and their combination (RSV+BCP) on Herpes Simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) infection in VERO cells determined by viral plaque reduction assay. Antiviral activity was expressed as percentage of viral inhibition relative to the untreated infected control. The horizontal dashed line indicates 50% viral inhibition. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three independent experiments (n = 3).

Fig. 2:

The concentration ranges evaluated in the antiviral assays were selected based on the CC₅₀ values obtained in VERO cells to ensure that all treatments were tested within a non-cytotoxic concentration range. The concentration-response curves used for CC₅₀ and IC₅₀ determination are provided in the Supplementary data (Figs 1-4).

After nanoencapsulation, NE RSV exhibited weak inhibitory activity against HSV-1, similar to the blank formulation, while NE BCP showed inhibition percentages close to 50%, with an IC₅₀ value of 115.80 µM. On the other hand, nanoemulsions containing both RSV and BCP demonstrated enhanced antiviral activity, achieving inhibition percentages above 70%, with an IC₅₀ value of 0.11 + 26.83 µM and a selectivity index (SI) of 159.36 (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3: effect of nanoemulsions containing resveratrol (NE RSV), β-caryophyllene (NE BCP), and their combination (NE RSV+BCP) on Herpes Simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) infection in VERO cells determined by viral plaque reduction assay. Antiviral activity was expressed as percentage of viral inhibition relative to the untreated infected control. The horizontal dashed line indicates 50% viral inhibition. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three independent experiments (n = 3).

Fig. 3:

Wound-healing assay and UV protection capacity: cytotoxicity assay - As shown in Table IV, the RSV nanoemulsions (NE RSV) demonstrated a higher CC50 value compared to that observed in the VERO cell line. In contrast, the CC50 value for the BCP nanoemulsion (NE BCP) remained very similar. However, for the combined RSV+BCP nanoemulsion (NE RSV+BCP), the CC50 value was approximately 12 times lower compared to that observed in the VERO cell line.

TABLE IV. Cytotoxicity of nanoemulsions in human gingival fibroblast (HGF) cells determined by the MTT assay.

Cell line NE RSV NE BCP NE RSV+BCP
CC50 μM CC50 μM CC50 μM
HGF 122.9 ± 4.98 359.8 ± 48.84 1.37 ± 0.38 RSV+335.2 ± 47.25 BCP

NE RSV: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol; NE BCP: nanoemulsion containing β-caryophyllene; NE RSV+BCP: nanoemulsion containing resveratrol and β-caryophyllene; CC50: 50% cytotoxic concentration (μM). Values are expressed in µM and represent the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three independent experiments (n = 3).

Scratch assay - Based on the results of the antiviral activity evaluation, concentrations of 0.98 µM NE RSV and 238.00 µM NE BCP were found to inhibit viral replication. Given these findings, preliminary experiments were conducted to investigate the potential effects of NE RSV, NE BCP, and NE RSV+BCP on the cellular wound healing process. The results demonstrated that, 24 h after wound induction, cells treated with NE BCP and NE RSV+BCP appeared detached, suggesting a possible interference with cell adhesion and migration, critical steps for wound closure. In contrast, treatment with NE RSV resulted in a slightly higher wound closure rate compared to the cell control, with percentages of 47.47% and 43.57%, respectively. After 48 h, the control group exhibited a wound closure rate of 76.25%, while the NE RSV treatment achieved 68.80%, indicating that although NE RSV promoted a more pronounced initial effect, the control group showed more consistent recovery over time. The NE Blank was also evaluated under the same experimental conditions and showed wound closure percentages of 46.06% and 58.95% after 24 and 48 h, respectively. Representative images of all experimental groups, including the blank formulation, are provided in the Supplementary data (Fig. 5).

To further explore these observations, three distinct concentrations of NE RSV (40, 20, and 10 µM) and NE BCP (125.00, 62.5, and 31.25 µM) were tested to evaluate their potential effects on accelerating the cellular healing process. The results demonstrated that neither NE RSV nor NE BCP promoted wound healing compared to the cell control, as evidenced in Figs 4-5. Notably, the highest concentration of NE RSV (40 µM) resulted in a significant reduction in wound closure compared to the control group. No statistically significant differences were observed among the remaining concentrations evaluated, suggesting that variations in dosage within the tested range did not substantially influence the tissue repair process.

Fig. 4: migration assay: wound closure percentage for nanoemulsions containing β-caryophyllene (NE BCP) (125.00 μM, 62.5 μM, and 31.25 μM) and untreated cells (CC) at 24 h and 48 hs. The tests were conducted on human gingival fibroblast (HGF) cells, and the results represent the average of three independent experiments.

Fig. 4:

Fig. 5: migration assay: wound closure percentage for nanoemulsions containing resveratrol (NE RSV) (40 μM, 20 μM, and 10 μM) and untreated cells (CC) at 24 h and 48 h. The tests were conducted on human gingival fibroblast (HGF) cells, and the results represent the average of three independent experiments. *Significant values (p < 0.05); one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s Post Hoc Test.

Fig. 5:

UVC irradiation and drug administration - Based on the antiviral activity results, the potential protective effects of NE RSV, NE BCP, and the combined NE RSV+BCP were initially assessed at concentrations of 0.98 μM, 238.00 μM, and their combination. As presented in Table V, NE RSV-treated cells exposed to UV irradiation showed viability levels comparable to those of the UV-exposed untreated cells, in contrast to cells subjected to simultaneous treatment and UV exposure. For the other formulations and experimental conditions, cell viability values remained largely comparable across the different treatment modalities.

TABLE V. Cell viability (%) after simultaneous treatment or 2 h pretreatment with nanoemulsion containing resveratrol (NE-RSV) (0.98 μM), nanoemulsion containing β-caryophyllene (NE-BCP) (238 μM), and nanoemulsion containing resveratrol and β-caryophyllene (NE-RSV+BCP) (0.98 + 238 μM) under UV-exposed and non-exposed conditions.

Samples Simultaneous treatment 2 h pretreatment
% cell viability % cell viability
Exposed to UV NE RSV 10.01 ± 3.80 54.92 ± 6.29
NE BCP 17.92 ± 2.50 16.10 ± 1.77
NE RSV+BCP 9.04 ± 2.19 8.07 ± 3.71
Untreated cells 52.03 ± 1.48 55.89 ± 2.34
Not exposed to UV NE RSV 77.90 ± 7.72 77.95 ± 2.81
NE BCP 66.26 ± 6.84 63.23 ± 6.23
NE RSV+BCP 52.49 ± 3.05 53.10 ± 2.64
Untreated cells 101.41 ± 2.00 100.00 ± 0.71

Values are expressed in µM and represent the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three independent experiments (n = 3).

Given these observations, additional assays were carried out using a concentration range of NE RSV (40, 20, and 10 μM) and NE BCP (125.00, 62.50, and 31.25 μM). The data indicate that, even at the higher concentrations tested, cell viability remained lower than that of the corresponding experimental untreated group (Table VI). Since no improvement in cell viability was observed for NE RSV+BCP under the initial experimental conditions, subsequent experiments were designed to evaluate whether different concentration ranges of the individual nanoemulsions (NE RSV and NE BCP) could provide protective effects against UVC-induced damage. As neither formulation showed beneficial effects in these additional assays, further evaluation of the combined nanoemulsion was not performed.

TABLE VI. Cell viability (%) after simultaneous treatment or 2 h pretreatment with nanoemulsion containing resveratrol (NE-RSV) and nanoemulsion containing β-caryophyllene (NE-BCP) under UV-exposed and non-exposed conditions.

Samples Concentration (μM) Simultaneous treatment 2 h pretreatment
% cell viability % cell viability
Exposed to UV NE RSV 40.00 46.67 ± 2.26 48.79 ± 6.49
20.00 50.73 ± 5.33 32.71 ± 6.50
10.00 24.72 ± 0.42 27.40 ± 3.34
NE BCP 125.00 20.66 ± 1.10 21.54 ± 2.25
62.50 16.54 ± 1.57 24.66 ± 5.54
31.25 12.73 ± 2.10 27.60 ± 6.67
Untreated cells - 52.03 ±1.48 55.89 ± 2.34
Not exposed to UV NE RSV 40.00 63.82 ± 3.49 65.40 ± 3.15
20.00 70.81 ± 3.48 74.31 ± 4.19
10.00 75.33 ± 1.05 75.53 ± 5.32
NE BCP 125.00 76.04 ± 0.97 77.34 ±5.52
62.50 80.68 ± 2.61 87.88 ± 4.74
31.25 82.49 ± 1.54 87.78 ± 0.59
Untreated cells - 101.41 ± 2.00 100.00 ± 1.13

Values are expressed in µM and represent the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three independent experiments (n = 3).

DISCUSSION

In this work, we investigated the therapeutic potential of nanoemulsions containing RSV and BCP for the treatment of HSV-1 infections. The developed formulations presented excellent physicochemical characteristics, with low PDI values (~0.2) indicating homogeneous particle size distribution, essential for colloidal stability. 34 , 35 The negative surface charge (-18.60 mV for NE RSV and -19.70 mV for NE Blank) probably results from ionised fatty acids present in MCT and Phosal®, and the addition of BCP significantly reduced this zeta potential to -9.31 mV (NE BCP) and -11.41 mV (NE RSV+BCP), suggesting specific interactions with surfactant compounds that modify the nanoparticle interface. 34 , 35 , 36 , 37

The stability of the formulations was maintained for 90 days under refrigeration, which can be attributed both to the intrinsic antimicrobial properties of the encapsulated active compounds 26 , 38 and to the presence of the surfactant Tween® 80, which contributed to the stability of the system by reducing droplet aggregation through hydrophobic interactions. 39

From a biological point of view, RSV maintained an excellent safety profile, with cell viability above 75% at all concentrations tested (0.03-15.63 µM), corroborating the findings of Docherty et al., 40 Huang et al. 41 and Zangooei et al. 42 Docherty et al. 40 demonstrated that concentrations of 25 μg/mL (~109 μM) inhibited 95% of viral replication in VERO and MRC-5 cells, while 50 μg/mL (~218 μM) completely abolished replication after 72 h of treatment, through specific inhibition of the expression of ICP-4 proteins, essential for viral replication. Complementing these findings, Leyton et al. 43 observed in hippocampal neurons infected with HSV-1 that treatment with RSV (100 μM) reduced viral protein levels by 50%, in addition to decreasing neurodegenerative markers (TauC3 and p-Tau), suggesting an additional neuroprotective effect. 43

In contrast, BCP showed distinct behaviour after nanoencapsulation, with increased toxicity (reduction in CC₅₀ from 1423 μM to 365.1 μM), in line with the results of Dahham et al. in several cell lines. 44 However, its antiviral activity was preserved, with IC₅₀ of 115.80 μM in the nanoencapsulated form, possibly due to the protection against oxidation provided by the nanoemulsion system. 25 This activity is in agreement with the studies of Schnitzler et al. 45 and Astani et al., 18 which demonstrated the ability of BCP to damage the viral envelope, significantly reducing the infectivity of HSV-1. 18 , 45

The most promising result was observed in the nanoencapsulated combination RSV+BCP, which showed remarkable antiviral synergy (IC₅₀ of 0.11 + 26.83 μM) with a high selectivity index (159.36). This synergy appears to result from the combination of two complementary mechanisms: the action of BCP in the extracellular viral inactivation, through damage to the viral envelope, and intracellular inhibition of viral replication by RSV, via suppression of the expression of essential viral proteins. 18 , 40 , 45 Nanoencapsulation enhanced this synergy, probably by maintaining the ideal ratio between the compounds during cellular delivery and protection against degradation.

The association between HSV infection and impaired wound healing has been widely reported, as viral replication can interfere with cellular processes involved in tissue repair, leading to delayed wound closure and increased tissue damage. 3 , 46 This condition may be further exacerbated by UV-induced oxidative stress, which is also known to promote cellular damage and contribute to HSV reactivation. 47

From a therapeutic perspective, these factors highlight the importance of developing strategies that combine antiviral activity with tissue-protective effects. Therefore, evaluating the potential of nanoemulsions not only in inhibiting viral replication but also in supporting tissue repair and protecting against environmental stressors becomes particularly relevant.

In addition to the antiviral activity, the healing and photoprotective potential of the nanoformulations was investigated. For this evaluation, HGF were selected as a biological model, and the cytotoxicity of the nanoemulsions was initially evaluated. In particular, the increase in the CC50 value of NE RSV suggests a greater biocompatibility of resveratrol when formulated in nanoemulsions, while the stability of the CC50 observed in NE BCP indicates that the nanoencapsulation maintained the characteristic cytotoxic profile of this compound. The most relevant finding was the significant 12-fold reduction in the CC₅₀ of the combined formulation NE RSV+BCP, suggesting a potential combinatorial effect, likely associated with enhanced cellular interaction and overlapping mechanisms of action at the cellular level, as commonly observed in nanoemulsion-based delivery systems. 24 , 38

In the wound healing studies, NE RSV showed a slightly higher wound closure percentage at 24 h (47.47% versus 43.57% in the control). However, when different concentrations were evaluated, the highest concentration tested (40 µM) resulted in a statistically significant reduction in wound closure compared to the control group. At 48 h, the control group showed more consistent recovery (76.25%) compared to NE RSV (68.80%). In addition, the NE Blank showed wound closure percentages of 46.06% and 58.95% after 24 and 48 h, respectively, and did not exhibit the pronounced loss of cell adhesion observed for NE BCP and NE RSV+BCP. These findings suggest that, under the evaluated experimental conditions, NE RSV did not promote wound healing and may even impair the wound closure process at higher concentrations. This observation is consistent with the known antifibrotic activity of RSV, which, as demonstrated by Bai et al., 48 Ishikawa et al. 49 and Rahal et al., 50 acts through modulation of the TGF-β pathway, a mechanism that may influence cellular migration and tissue remodeling. 51 Interestingly, our data partially contrast with the findings of Pang et al. 52 and Smith et al., 53 who observed concentration-dependent effects of RSV on wound healing in different cellular models. This apparent contradiction, also noted by the authors themselves, reinforces the importance of factors such as cell type and concentration in the response to RSV. Overall, the evaluated nanoemulsions did not promote wound healing, suggesting that nanoencapsulation may modulate the biological activity of RSV under the experimental conditions investigated.

As for BCP, our results diverge from those reported by KK Aathira et al., 54 who observed an acceleration of cell migration (91.34% in 48 h with 145.3 µM) using free BCP. Therefore, this comparison should be interpreted with caution, as nanoencapsulation may significantly alter the interaction of the compound with cells and the extracellular matrix. The cell detachment induced by NE BCP and NE RSV+BCP in our study suggests that the nanoformulation can fundamentally alter the interaction of the compound with the extracellular matrix. It is plausible that the activation of the CB2 receptor by BCP, well documented by Koyama et al. 20 as a pro-healing mechanism, is being affected by the nanoencapsulated delivery system. 55

Regarding photoprotective properties, the results of the present study reveal significant differences in the protective effects against UVC radiation between RSV and BCP nanoemulsions and their free counterparts described in the literature. While Chan et al. 56 demonstrated a clear protective effect of free RSV (10 µM) in ARPE19 cells, maintaining 75% viability after UVA exposure, a result also found in the work of Subedi et al., 57 RSV nanoemulsions only preserved viability at levels similar to untreated controls. This difference becomes evident when compared with the data of Cui et al., 58 who observed increases of up to 19.45% in the viability of HaCaT cells treated with free RSV in the same concentration range used in our study.

The apparent reduction in the protective efficacy of nanoformulations can be attributed to several factors. First, nanoencapsulation can alter the release kinetics of RSV, delaying or reducing its intracellular availability at the time of exposure to UVC radiation. 59 Furthermore, the nanostructured formulation itself may interfere with RSV mechanisms. 60 , 61 Finally, differences in experimental protocols, particularly in the time of exposure to UV radiation, the type of radiation and distance may contribute to the observed differences.

In the case of BCP, the absence of a protective effect in our nanoemulsions, even at relatively high concentrations (up to 238 µM), contrasts with studies demonstrating significant biological activities of this compound in other experimental models, including effects on cell proliferation and wound healing. 20 , 55 This suggests that nanoencapsulation may be preventing BCP from accessing its molecular targets or that the mechanisms of protection against UVC damage require free forms of the compound.

Final consideration - In conclusion, this study demonstrated the potential of nanoemulsions containing RSV and BCP as a novel approach for the treatment of HSV-1 infections. The nanoemulsions exhibited significant antiviral activity, particularly when RSV and BCP were combined. However, the increased cytotoxicity of BCP following nanoencapsulation warrants further investigation to optimise the formulation for clinical use. Although the nanoemulsions did not show significant improvement in wound healing or protective effects against UV radiation exposure, their stability and antiviral efficacy reinforce their potential for topical application. Both nanoemulsions displayed monodispersion and maintained appropriate particle size and stability for up to 90 days when stored at 4ºC. These findings suggest that additional studies are needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of action, optimise the formulation for enhanced wound-healing properties, and evaluate its safety and efficacy in vivo.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS

Supplementary material

Funding Statement

CAPES provided a master’s fellowship to IDP in the Programa de Pós-Graduação em Farmácia, UFSC.

Footnotes

Financial support: CAPES provided a master’s fellowship to IDP in the Programa de Pós-Graduação em Farmácia, UFSC.

How to cite:

Prá ID, Porto DS, Port BCB, Schulte LG, Argenta DF, Caon T, et al. Nanoemulsions loaded with b-caryophyllene and resveratrol for herpes infections. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2026; 121: e250333.

DATA AVAILABILITY

After publication the data will be available on demand to corresponding author.

REFERENCE

  • 1.WHO - World Health Organization Herpes simplex virus. 2023. [2025 Feb 19]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/herpes-simplex-virus .
  • 2.Lee S, Ives AM, Bertke AS. Herpes simplex virus 1 reactivates from autonomic ciliary ganglia independently from sensory trigeminal ganglia to cause recurrent ocular disease. J Virol. 2015;89(16):8383–8391. doi: 10.1128/JVI.00468-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cunningham AL, Diefenbach RJ, Miranda-Saksena M, Bosnjak L, Kim M, Jones C, et al. The cycle of human herpes simplex virus infection: virus transport and immune control. J Infect Dis. 2006;194(Suppl. 1):S11–S18. doi: 10.1086/505359. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.James C, Harfouche M, Welton NJ, Turner KME, Abu-Raddad LJ, Gottlieb SL, et al. Herpes simplex virus: global infection prevalence and incidence estimates, 2016. Bull World Health Organ. 2020;98(5):315–329. doi: 10.2471/blt.19.237149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Looker KJ, Magaret AS, May MT, Turner KME, Vickerman P, Gottlieb SL, et al. Global and regional estimates of prevalent and incident herpes simplex virus type 1 infections in 2012. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):1–17. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Baldwin KJ, Cummings CL. Herpesvirus infections of the nervous system. Continuum. 2018;24(5):1349–1369. doi: 10.1212/CON.0000000000000661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Piret J, Boivin G. Resistance of herpes simplex viruses to nucleoside analogues: mechanisms, prevalence, and management. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(2):459–472. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00615-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sauerbrei A. Optimal management of genital herpes: current perspectives. Infect Drug Resist. 2016;9:129–141. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S96164. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hung PY, Ho BC, Lee SY, Chang SY, Kao CL, Lee SS, et al. Houttuynia cordata targets the beginning stage of herpes simplex virus infection. PLoS One. 2015;10(2):1–19. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0115475. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Bisignano C, Mandalari G, Smeriglio A, Trombetta D, Pizzo MM, Pennisi R, et al. Almond skin extracts abrogate HSV-1 replication by blocking virus binding to the cell. Viruses. 2017;9(7):178. doi: 10.3390/v9070178. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Musarra-Pizzo M, Pennisi R, Ben-Amor I, Smeriglio A, Mandalari G, Sciortino MT. In vitro anti-HSV-1 activity of polyphenol-rich extracts and pure polyphenol compounds derived from pistachio kernels (Pistacia vera L.) Plants (Basel) 2020;9(2):267. doi: 10.3390/plants9020267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Docherty JJ, Smith JS, Fu MM, Stoner T, Booth T. Effect of topically applied resveratrol on cutaneous herpes simplex virus infections in hairless mice. Antiviral Res. 2004;61(1):19–26. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2003.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Abedini E, Khodadadi E, Zeinalzadeh E, Moaddab SR, Asgharzadeh M, Mehramouz B, et al. A comprehensive study on the antimicrobial properties of resveratrol as an alternative therapy. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2021;2021:1–15. doi: 10.1155/2021/8866311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Pieracci Y, Ascrizzi R, Terreni V, Pistelli L, Flamini G, Bassolino L, et al. Essential oil of Cannabis sativa L.: comparison of yield and chemical composition of 11 hemp genotypes. Molecules. 2021;26(13):4080. doi: 10.3390/molecules26134080. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Mahboubi M, Mahboubi M. Chemical composition, antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of Eugenia caryophyllata essential oil. J Essent Oil Bear Plants. 2015;18(4):967–975. doi: 10.1080/0972060X.2014.884779. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Andriana Y, Xuan TD, Quy TN, Tran HD, Le QT. Biological activities and chemical constituents of essential oils from Piper cubeba Bojer and Piper nigrum L. . Molecules. 2019;24(10):1876. doi: 10.3390/molecules24101876. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Politeo O, Skocibusic M, Maravic A, Ruscic M, Milos M. Chemical composition and antimicrobial activity of the essential oil of endemic Dalmatian black pine (Pinus nigra ssp. dalmatica) Chem Biodivers. 2011;8(3):540–547. doi: 10.1002/cbdv.201000185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Astani A, Reichling J, Schnitzler P. Screening for antiviral activities of isolated compounds from essential oils. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:253643. doi: 10.1093/ecam/nep187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zefzoufi M, Fdil R, Bouamama H, Gadhi C, Katakura Y, Mouzdahir A, et al. Effect of extracts and isolated compounds derived from Retama monosperma (L.) Boiss. on anti-aging gene expression in human keratinocytes and antioxidant activity. J Ethnopharmacol. 2021;280:114451. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2021.114451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Koyama S, Purk A, Kaur M, Soini HA, Novotny MV, Davis K, et al. Beta-caryophyllene enhances wound healing through multiple routes. PLoS One. 2019;14(12):e0216104. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sovrani V, Bobermin LD, Sesterheim P, Rezena E, Cioccari MS, Netto CA, et al. Glioprotective effects of resveratrol in hypothalamic astrocyte cultures obtained from interferon receptor knockout (IFNα/βR−/−) mice. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. 2023;59(5):366–380. doi: 10.1007/s11626-023-00777-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Weimer P, Lock GA, Nunes KAA, Rossi RC, Koester LS. Association effect of the phytocannabinoid beta-caryophyllene and indomethacin carried in topical nanoemulgels: an evaluation by in vivo anti-inflammatory model. Nat Prod Res. 2024:1–8. doi: 10.1080/14786419.2024.2317887. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Aziz MH, Kumar R, Ahmad N. Cancer chemoprevention by resveratrol: in vitro and in vivo studies and the underlying mechanisms. Int J Oncol. 2003;23(1):17–28. doi: 10.3892/ijo.23.1.17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Barradas TN, de Holanda e Silva KG. Nanoemulsions of essential oils to improve solubility, stability and permeability: a review. Environ Chem Lett. 2021;19:1153–1171. doi: 10.1007/s10311-020-01142-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Sköld M, Karlberg AT, Matura M, Börje A. The fragrance chemical β-caryophyllene: air oxidation and skin sensitization. Food Chem Toxicol. 2006;44(4):538–545. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2005.08.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Porto DS, Port BC, Conte J, Argenta DF, Balleste MP, Micke GA, et al. Development of ophthalmic nanoemulsions of β-caryophyllene for the treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis . Int J Pharm. 2024;659:124252. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Devi P, Sharma P, Rathore C, Negi P. Resveratrol: adding life to years, not adding years to life. London: IntechOpen; 2019. Novel drug delivery systems of resveratrol to bioavailability and therapeutic effects. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Pavoni L, Perinelli DR, Bonacucina G, Cespi M, Palmieri GF. An overview of micro- and nanoemulsions as vehicles for essential oils: formulation, preparation and stability. Nanomaterials (Basel) 2020;10(1):135. doi: 10.3390/nano10010135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Burleson FG, Chambers TM, Wiedbrauk DL. Virology: a laboratory manual. San Diego: Academic Press; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Singh M, Bharadwaj S, Lee KE, Kang SG. Therapeutic nanoemulsions in ophthalmic drug administration: concept in formulations and characterization techniques for ocular drug delivery. J Control Release. 2020;328:895–916. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2020.10.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Vichai V, Kirtikara K. Sulforhodamine B colorimetric assay for cytotoxicity screening. Nat Protoc. 2006;1(3):1112–1116. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Mosmann T. Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Methods. 1983;65(1-2):55–63. doi: 10.1016/0022-1759(83)90303-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Suarez-Arnedo A, Figueroa FT, Clavijo C, Arbeláez P, Cruz JC, Muñoz-Camargo C. An ImageJ plugin for the high-throughput image analysis of in vitro scratch wound healing assays. PLoS One. 2020;15(7):e0232565. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Alex AT, Joseph A, Shavi G, Rao JV, Udupa N. Development and evaluation of carboplatin-loaded PCL nanoparticles for intranasal delivery. Drug Deliv. 2016;23(8):2954–2963. doi: 10.3109/10717544.2014.948643. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Rahat I, Imam SS, Rizwanullah M, Alshehri S, Asif M, Kala C, et al. Thymoquinone-entrapped chitosan-modified nanoparticles: formulation optimization to preclinical bioavailability assessments. Drug Deliv. 2021;28(1):973–984. doi: 10.1080/10717544.2021.1927245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Tadros T, Izquierdo P, Esquena J, Solans C. Formation and stability of nano-emulsions. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 2004;108-109:303–318. doi: 10.1016/j.cis.2003.10.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.McClements DJ. Nanoemulsions versus microemulsions: terminology, differences, and similarities. Soft Matter. 2012;8(6):1719–1729. doi: 10.1039/C2SM06903B. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Donsì F, Sessa M, Mediouni H, Mgaidi A, Ferrari G. Encapsulation of bioactive compounds in nanoemulsion-based delivery systems. Procedia Food Sci. 2011;1:1666–1671. doi: 10.1016/j.profoo.2011.09.246. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Tai K, He X, Yuan X, Meng K, Gao Y, Yuan F. A comparison of physicochemical and functional properties of icaritin-loaded liposomes based on different surfactants. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp. 2017;518:218–231. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2017.01.019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Docherty JJ, Fu MMH, Stiffler BS, Limperos RJ, Pokabla CM, DeLucia AL. Resveratrol inhibition of herpes simplex virus replication. Antiviral Res. 1999;43(3):145–155. doi: 10.1016/S0166-3542(99)00042-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Huang Z, Li S, Zhong L, Su Y, Li M, Wang X, et al. Effect of resveratrol on herpesvirus encephalitis: evidences for its mechanisms of action. Phytomedicine. 2024;127:155476. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2024.155476. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Zangooie S, Ghanbari R, Jalilian FA, Mahmoudvand S, Teimoori A. Antiviral potential of phenolic compounds against HSV-1: in vitro study. Antivir Ther. 2024;29:13596535241271589. doi: 10.1177/13596535241271589. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Leyton L, Hott M, Acuña F, Caroca J, Nuñez M, Martin C, et al. Nutraceutical activators of AMPK/Sirt1 axis inhibit viral production and protect neurons from neurodegenerative events triggered during HSV-1 infection. Virus Res. 2015;205:45–57. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2015.05.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Dahham SS, Tabana YM, Iqbal MA, Ahamed MBK, Ezzat MO, Majid ASA, et al. The anticancer, antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of the sesquiterpene β-caryophyllene from the essential oil of Aquilaria crassna . Molecules. 2015;20(7):11808–11829. doi: 10.3390/molecules200711808. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Schnitzler P, Schuhmacher A, Astani A, Reichling J. Melissa officinalis oil affects infectivity of enveloped herpesviruses. Phytomedicine. 2008;15(9):734–740. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2008.04.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Arduino PG, Porter SR. Herpes simplex virus type 1 infection: overview on relevant clinico-pathological features. J Oral Pathol Med. 2008;37(2):107–121. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0714.2007.00586.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Rittié L, Fisher GJ. UV-light-induced signal cascades and skin aging. Ageing Res Rev. 2002;1(4):705–720. doi: 10.1016/S1568-1637(02)00024-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Bai Y, Lu H, Wu C, Liang Y, Wang S, Lin C, et al. Resveratrol inhibits epithelial-mesenchymal transition and renal fibrosis by antagonizing the hedgehog signaling pathway. Biochem Pharmacol. 2014;92(3):484–493. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2014.09.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Ishikawa K, He S, Terasaki H, Nazari H, Zhang H, Spee C, et al. Resveratrol inhibits epithelial-mesenchymal transition of retinal pigment epithelium and development of proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Sci Rep. 2015;5:16386. doi: 10.1038/srep16386. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Rahal K, Schmiedlin-Ren P, Adler J, Dhanani M, Sultani V, Rittershaus AC, et al. Resveratrol has anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic effects in the peptidoglycan-polysaccharide rat model of Crohn’s disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2012;18(4):613–623. doi: 10.1002/ibd.21843. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Kim SI, Choi ME. TGF-β-activated kinase-1: new insights into the mechanism of TGF-β signaling and kidney disease. Kidney Res Clin Pract. 2012;31(2):94–105. doi: 10.1016/j.krcp.2012.04.322. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Pang K, Li B, Tang Z, Yang W, Hao L, Shi Z, et al. Resveratrol inhibits hypertrophic scar formation by activating autophagy via the miR-4654/Rheb axis. Mol Med Rep. 2020;22(4):3440–3452. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2020.11407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Smith AJO, Eldred JA, Wormstone IM. Resveratrol inhibits wound healing and lens fibrosis: a putative candidate for posterior capsule opacification prevention. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2019;60(13):4582–4591. doi: 10.1167/iovs.18-26248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Akhil KK, Ranjith SR, Chetna V, Satheesan A, Nair AR, Kariyil BJ, et al. Comprehensive investigation of beta-caryophyllene for wound healing potential: in silico docking on key targets and in vitro evaluation on mouse fibroblast cell line. Int J Vet Sci Anim Husb. 2024;9(1):1321–1328. doi: 10.22271/veterinary.2024.v9.i1t.1155. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Irrera N, D’Ascola A, Pallio G, Bitto A, Mannino F, Arcoraci V, et al. β-caryophyllene inhibits cell proliferation through a direct modulation of CB2 receptors in glioblastoma cells. Cancers (Basel) 2020;12(4):1038. doi: 10.3390/cancers12041038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Chan CM, Huang CH, Li HJ, Hsiao CY, Su CC, Lee PL, et al. Protective effects of resveratrol against UVA-induced damage in ARPE19 cells. Int J Mol Sci. 2015;16(3):5789–5802. doi: 10.3390/ijms16035789. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Subedi L, Lee TH, Wahedi HM, Baek SH, Kim SY. Resveratrol-enriched rice attenuates UVB-ROS-induced skin aging via downregulation of inflammatory cascades. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2017;2017:8379539. doi: 10.1155/2017/8379539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Cui B, Wang Y, Jin J, Yang Z, Guo R, Li X, et al. Resveratrol treats UVB-induced photoaging by anti-MMP expression, through anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and antiapoptotic properties, and treats photoaging by upregulating VEGF-B expression. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2022;2022:6037303. doi: 10.1155/2022/6037303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Sharma B, Iqbal B, Kumar S, Ali J, Baboota S. Resveratrol-loaded nanoemulsion gel system to ameliorate UV-induced oxidative skin damage: from in vitro to in vivo investigation of antioxidant activity enhancement. Arch Dermatol Res. 2019;311(10):773–793. doi: 10.1007/s00403-019-01964-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Cruz AT, Di Filippo LD, Duarte JL, Guillot AJ, Pérez-García A, Melero A, et al. Solid lipid nanoparticles for skin delivery of trans-resveratrol: impact of preparation methods on formulation stability. Cosmetics. 2025;12(1):7. doi: 10.3390/cosmetics12010007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Alvarez-Román R, Naik A, Kalia YN, Guy RH, Fessi H. Skin penetration and distribution of polymeric nanoparticles. J Control Release. 2004;99(1):53–62. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz.

FIRST REVIEW ROUND - REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS

Anonymous

REVIEWER #1

The article “NANOEMULSIONS LOADED WITH β-CARYOPHYLLENE AND RESVERATROL FOR HERPES INFECTIONS” presents a valuable scientific contribution. The study addresses a relevant topic by evaluating nanoemulsions loaded with β-caryophyllene and resveratrol as an alternative approach for the treatment of herpes infections.

a) Adequacy of the abstract: The abstract is well structured, clear, and effectively summarizes the objectives, methodology, main results, and conclusions of the study.

b) Originality and importance of the contribution:

The work demonstrates originality and represents an important contribution to the advancement of the field, particularly in the development of nanoemulsion-based systems for bioactive compounds with antiviral potential.

c) Methodology, results, and discussion:

The methodology is appropriate and well described, and the results are relevant and consistent with the objectives of the study. The discussion adequately interprets the findings and places them within the context of existing literature.

It is suggested that the following comments be taken into consideration:

Page 6, lines 37 and 41: replace “Singh and collaborators” with “Sing et al.” and “Santos Porto and collaborators” with “Santos Porto et al.”

Page 9, line 55: replace “Suarez-Arnedo and collaborators” with “Suarez-Arnedo et al.” The same suggestion applies to page 15, line 39.

Page 6, lines 54–56: According to Table I, 25 mL of ethanol and 50 mL of Milli-Q water are used. The wording of “Finally, ethanol was removed under reduced pressure at 32 °C, resulting in a final volume of formulation of 10 mL” should be improved, as it is not clear how the water would evaporate at 32 °C.

Tables III, IV, and V: The number of replicates and the standard deviation should be reported.

d) References: The references are relevant, up to date, and appropriately support the background and discussion of the study. It is suggested that the following comments be taken into consideration: The introduction may benefit from the inclusion of a paragraph discussing nanoemulsions and their use for encapsulating bioactive compounds, such as β-caryophyllene and resveratrol.

e) Figures and tables: The figures and tables are generally clear and informative. However, in Tables III, IV, and V, the number of replicates and the corresponding standard deviation should be reported to improve the clarity and statistical robustness of the results.

REVIEWER #2

The manuscript by Dai Prá et al. entitled “NANOEMULSIONS LOADED WITH β-CARYOPHYLLENE AND RESVERATROL FOR HERPES INFECTIONS” is a study that evaluate potential therapies for Herpes.

Even if the contents can have some interest for the reader, in my opinion, several issues have to be solved before considering the manuscript suitable for publication.

The paper is generally unclear. A more organized presentation can improve the message significantly, clearly stating the objectives, methods, and results. Special attention should be given to the results and discussion, since there are a lot of missing results and the ones that are present in the paper are not fully compared to the literature. Also, the efficacy of the test treatment is unclear, and more experiments should be done to evaluate it.

Abstract

The conclusion to the abstract is ambiguous for the results presented in the paper.

Keyword:

All the keywords are in the abstract or tite. I suggest choosing a different set of words tconducto provide more research and locate the published work.

Introduction

Pg 5, line 39: Besides WHO recognizing the need to develop new therapies against HSV, the paper does not show the relevance in it, since they cite the long-term prophylactic treatment, but how common is this kind of treatment? How many HSV strains are drug-resistant? A clearer explanation of these parts is important to justify the work’s relevance.

Pg 5, line 41: the citation of the sentence isn’t of the WHO or Herpes Cure Advocacy. It is relevant to cite them directly in this case.

Pg 5, line 45: “…as they are usually safer or result in lower toxicity than synthetic ones.” This affirmation is controversial, since lots of commercial and illegal drugs are derived from plant-based compounds. Therefore, at least, a citation to support this affirmation is important.

Pg 6, line 29: It isn’t clear in the introduction why nanotechnology is necessary to vector the RSV and BCP, since these make the process more expensive.

Pg 6, line 32: There is a lot of work with these molecules nanoencapsulated, and they are not cited, nor is the nanoemulsion used for this purpose. In the introduction, the only part that mentions the nanoemulsion provides no references to support it.

Methodology:

Pg 6, line 46: I suggest that the specific medium-chain triglycerides be specified.

Pg 7, line 54: the final volume is lower than the initial volume of water, so ethanol and water must be removed.

Pg 8, line 16: since you dilute the sample to analyse in the DLS, how do you guarantee that the increase in water does not impact the final volume of the sample? I suggest you characterize the sample using a methodology that does not require such dilution, such as Cryo-TEM or SAXS.

Pg 11, line 16: “All assays were performed in triplicate The 50% cytotoxic concentration (CC50)”. It is missing a dot between the words “triplicate” and “The”.

An experiment to evaluate how much RSV and BCP are encapsulated and the quality of these components is important to ensure that the results are due to the drug and not to degradation products that may occur during the process.

Results:

Pg 12, line 35: After the sentence, write (data not shown).

Pg. 12, line 37: In the first paragraph of item 3.3, the results are described, but no figure or table presenting them is shown. Therefore, I suggest including a figure with graphs in the paper to better illustrate the results, especially the comparison between the nanoformulation and the free drug. This is important because some conclusions are unsupported by the paper, and it is unclear how the doses used in the antiviral test were selected.

Pg 13: Figures 2 and 3 could have clearer legends with more details on how the statistics are calculated and whether the graphs show standard deviation or standard error. Also, the resolution of the figures is low.

Pg13: The chosen doses for the antiviral activity are not well explained, since they are much lower than the IC50 in the VERO cells.

Pg 13, line 38: The first paragraph of the item 3.4 Wound-healing assay and UV protection capacity” are discussion and not results.

Pg. 14, line 16: I suggest including the CC50 value for VERO in Table III to make comparisons easier. In the table, it is important to include the µM symbol, not only in the legend.

The cytotoxicity results in HGF are not presented. These data are essential because they guide the dose selection for subsequent experiments.

Pg 14, line 28: The data are not shown in figures or tables. Therefore, it is not possible to evaluate. Also, it would be nice to have optical microscopy images for the scratch assay.

Pg 14, line 44: The results shown in Figure 5 are contrary to the sentence.

Pg 15, line 26: In the title of Table IV, describe the dose used for the material in the test.

Since there was a detachment of the cell treated with NE BCP and NE BCP+RSV but not in the NE RSV, it would be important to repeat this experiment using blank NE and Free drug BCP to observe if this happens because of the BCP dose or because of the NE.

Pg15, line 18: The results for the NE RSV+BCP are not shown for these tests. Why did the authors choose not to test them?

Discuss:

Pg 16, lines 9: The value of the Zeta potential of the NE Blank are type different from the one described in Table II.

Pg 16, line 14: It is important to cite supporting literature for the group hypothesis. Therefore, I suggest the addition of a literature reference in the first paragraph of the discussion. Here are some suggestions: Hemlata et al. (2025) – doi: 10.1093/biomethods/bpaf066.; Muntimadugu et al. (2022) – doi: 10.3390/ijms23074034; Guo et al. (2021) – doi: 10.3390/nano11051293.

Pg 16, line 39: The dose of RSV reported in the literature cited in this work is higher than the dose used for the cell viability study. Therefore, it is unclear why the dose range of 0.03-15.63 µM was chosen for the study of cell viability.

Pg. 17, line 24: Since this work did not study the mechanism of action of the drugs BCP and RSV on the viruses, it is important that the appropriate literature be cited in this paragraph.

Pg 18, line 6: Again, the appropriate literature should be cited.

Pg 18, line 12: No statistical difference was observed in the NE RSV when compared to the control group in 24h at the wound healing studies. Therefore, this slight increase is insignificant.

Pg 18, line 42: Since the work of KK, Aathira et al (2024) is in silico and does not evaluate the nanoparticle of BCP, only free BCP, the comparison with the group work should be done carefully.

Pg 20, line 39. “…contrasts with studies demonstrating significant biological activities of this compound..” cite the studies.

In the discussion section, an explanation should be added on why different methodologies of evaluation of citizenship were used. Because the methodologies for HGF and VERO differ, it is not possible to compare the results.

It should also include an explanation of why the selected RSV doses for wound closure were 10, 20, and 40 µm. Also, the results for these experiments

EDITOR COMMENTS:

1. The authors must substantively address the main points raised by Reviewer 2 regarding the methodology and experimental design.

2. In Table III, it is necessary to correct the CC50 value (1.37 + 335.2) of the “NE RSV+BCP” condition. Furthermore, as requested by Reviewers 1 and 2, all tables must contain the mean and standard deviation, as well as the number of experiments performed.

3. “Figure 2. Effect of the RSV, BCP and RSV+BCP on HSV-1 (KOS strain) in VERO cells (n=3) deviation”. As requested by Reviewer 2, this figure must contain the mean and standard deviation.

4. “and the RSV+BCP combination was tested at the same concentrations in a fixed ratio (1:244).” Why was the combination used at that specific concentration? This should be clear to the readers.

5. The authors use “min” and “minutes”, for example in “for 30 min” and “ 50 mJ/cm² for 30 minutes”. The authors should standardize this throughout the manuscript. The same applies to “hours” and “h”. Standardization is necessary.

6. The abbreviation and company name for fetal bovine serum should be used first in “and supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (Gibco).” Afterwards, use only the abbreviation.

7. The citation format throughout the manuscript needs to be modified. Please remove the year of publication from all ‘et al.’ citations, particularly in the Materials and Methods and Discussion sections, to adhere to the journal’s formatting guidelines.

AUTHORS’ RESPONSE TO THE REVIEWERS

The Editorial Office

Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz

Dear Editor,

Thank you very much for your interest in our manuscript “Nanoemulsions loaded with β-caryophyllene and resveratrol for herpes infections”.

We are very grateful for the comments and suggestions of the reviewers and we have revised our manuscript accordingly. The formatting alterations and modifications in the text were performed and saved in the file “editor corrections”.

The improvements and comments are described below in a detailed point-by-point response.

We thank you and the reviewers for the critical and valuable comments. We believe that they have helped us to improve the manuscript substantially and we hope that the manuscript is now acceptable for publication in Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz.

Sincerely yours,

Professor Izabella Thaís Silva, PhD

REVIEWER COMMENTS:

Reviewer 1:

The article “NANOEMULSIONS LOADED WITH β-CARYOPHYLLENE AND RESVERATROL

FOR HERPES INFECTIONS” presents a valuable scientific contribution. The study addresses a relevant topic by evaluating nanoemulsions loaded with β-caryophyllene and resveratrol as an alternative approach for the treatment of herpes infections.

Adequacy of the abstract: The abstract is well structured, clear, and effectively summarizes the objectives, methodology, main results, and conclusions of the study.

Originality and importance of the contribution: The work demonstrates originality and represents an important contribution to the advancement of the field, particularly in the development of nanoemulsion-based systems for bioactive compounds with antiviral potential.

Methodology, results, and discussion: The methodology is appropriate and well described, and the results are relevant and consistent with the objectives of the study. The discussion adequately interprets the findings and places them within the context of existing literature.

It is suggested that the following comments be taken into consideration:

Page 6, lines 37 and 41: replace “Singh and collaborators” with “Sing et al.” and “Santos Porto and collaborators” with “Santos Porto et al.”

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. The requested adjustments have been made in the revised manuscript.

Page 9, line 55: replace “Suarez-Arnedo and collaborators” with “Suarez-Arnedo et al.” The same suggestion applies to page 15, line 39.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. The requested adjustments have been made in the revised manuscript.

Page 6, lines 54–56: According to Table I, 25 mL of ethanol and 50 mL of Milli-Q water are used. The wording of “Finally, ethanol was removed under reduced pressure at 32 °C, resulting in a final volume of formulation of 10 mL” should be improved, as it is not clear how the water would evaporate at 32 °C.

Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree that the original wording was unclear. The reduced pressure applied during rotary evaporation was sufficient to remove not only the ethanol (organic phase) but also part of the water, thereby concentrating the formulation to a final volume of 10 mL. To avoid ambiguity, we have revised the sentence as follows:

“Finally, the organic solvent and excess water were removed under reduced pressure at 215 rpm and 32 °C, resulting in a final formulation volume of 10 mL.”

Tables III, IV, and V: The number of replicates and the standard deviation should be reported.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. The standard deviation (SD) values have been added to Tables III, IV, V, and VI to better represent data variability and improve the clarity of the cytotoxicity results.

References: The references are relevant, up to date, and appropriately support the background and discussion of the study. It is suggested that the following comments be taken into consideration: The introduction may benefit from the inclusion of a paragraph

discussing nanoemulsions and their use for encapsulating bioactive compounds, such as β-caryophyllene and resveratrol.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. We agree that the introduction would benefit from a dedicated paragraph contextualizing nanoemulsions and their relevance for encapsulating BCP and RSV. The following paragraph has been added at the end of the Introduction, immediately before the final paragraph stating the study objectives:

“Nanoemulsions are colloidal dispersions composed of two immiscible phases, typically oil and wate, stabilized by surfactants and co-surfactants, with droplet sizes generally ranging from 10 to 200 nm. Their nanometric size confers unique properties, including a large interfacial surface area and enhanced kinetic stability, which contribute to improved solubility, bioavailability, and controlled release of encapsulated bioactive compounds (Barradas & Holanda e Silva, 2021; Li et al., 2023). These characteristics make nanoemulsions particularly suitable for the delivery of lipophilic natural compounds.

In this context, nanoencapsulation represents a promising strategy for compounds such as β-caryophyllene (BCP) and resveratrol (RSV), which present important pharmaceutical limitations. BCP is highly susceptible to air oxidation, leading to the formation of caryophyllene oxide, a less biologically active derivative, while its volatility further reduces therapeutic efficacy during storage (Sköld et al., 2006; Santos Porto et al., 2024). RSV, in turn, suffers from poor aqueous solubility, photoisomerization from the active trans- to the inactive cis-form, and extensive first-pass metabolism, which severely limit its bioavailability (Li et al., 2023; Devi et al., 2019). Nanoemulsions prepared by low-energy methods, such as spontaneous emulsification, provide a protective lipid environment that minimizes degradation while enhancing interaction with biological membranes and facilitating cellular uptake (Barradas & Holanda e Silva, 2021; Pavoni et al., 2020). Therefore, nanoemulsions emerge as a rational strategy to improve the therapeutic performance of RSV and BCP.

Considering the variety of pharmacological activities described above and the already known safety profile of these compounds, the hypothesis of this study was to investigate whether both could act synergistically against HSV. Additionally, this study aimed to evaluate whether nanoencapsulation of these active compounds could improve their anti-herpetic activity.”

Figures and tables: The figures and tables are generally clear and informative. However, in Tables III, IV, and V, the number of replicates and the corresponding standard deviation should be reported to improve the clarity and statistical robustness of the results.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. Standard deviations and a note indicating that the values represent the mean of three independent experiments (n = 3) have been added to Tables III, IV, and V in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2:

The manuscript by Dai Prá et al. entitled “NANOEMULSIONS LOADED WITH β-CARYOPHYLLENE AND RESVERATROL FOR HERPES INFECTIONS” is a study that evaluate potential therapies for Herpes. Even if the contents can have some interest for the reader, in my opinion, several issues have to be solved before considering the manuscript suitable for publication.

The paper is generally unclear. A more organized presentation can improve the message significantly, clearly stating the objectives, methods, and results. Special attention should be given to the results and discussion, since there are a lot of missing results and the ones that are present in the paper are not fully compared to the literature. Also, the efficacy of the test treatment is unclear, and more experiments should be done to evaluate it.

Abstract

The conclusion to the abstract is ambiguous for the results presented in the paper.

Response: Thank you for this comment. We agree that the conclusion of the abstract could be clearer and more directly reflect the results of the study. Accordingly, the final sentence of the abstract has been revised to explicitly highlight the enhanced antiviral activity observed for the combined RSV and BCP nanoemulsions, indicating a synergistic effect between both compounds. The revised version also clarifies the effects of nanoencapsulation on cytotoxicity and acknowledges the lack of significant impact on wound healing and UV protection assays. These changes have been incorporated in the revised manuscript.

Keyword: All the keywords are in the abstract or title. I suggest choosing a different set of words tconducto provide more research and locate the published work.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. The requested adjustments have been made in the revised manuscript.

Introduction

Pg 5, line 39: Besides WHO recognizing the need to develop new therapies against HSV, the paper does not show the relevance in it, since they cite the long-term prophylactic treatment, but how common is this kind of treatment? How many HSV strains are drug-resistant? A clearer explanation of these parts is important to justify the work’s relevance.

Pg 5, line 41: the citation of the sentence isn’t of the WHO or Herpes Cure Advocacy. It is relevant to cite them directly in this case.

Pg 5, line 45: “…as they are usually safer or result in lower toxicity than synthetic ones.” This affirmation is controversial, since lots of commercial and illegal drugs are derived from plant-based compounds. Therefore, at least, a citation to support this affirmation is important.

Pg 6, line 29: It isn’t clear in the introduction why nanotechnology is necessary to vector the RSV and BCP, since these make the process more expensive. Pg 6, line 32: There is a lot of work with these molecules nanoencapsulated, and they are not cited, nor is the nanoemulsion used for this purpose. In the introduction, the only part that mentions the nanoemulsion provides no supporting references.

Response: Thank you for these comments. The Introduction has been revised to improve clarity and strengthen the justification of the study. Additional information on long-term suppressive therapy and the prevalence of drug-resistant HSV strains has been included. The statement regarding the need for new therapies has been corrected to directly cite the World Health Organization. The description of plant-derived compounds has been revised to avoid overgeneralization and is now supported by an appropriate reference. Furthermore, the rationale for nanoencapsulation has been clarified based on the physicochemical limitations of RSV and BCP, and a dedicated paragraph on nanoemulsions, supported by relevant references, has been added. These changes have been incorporated in the revised manuscript.

Methodology:

Pg 6, line 46: I suggest that the specific medium-chain triglycerides be specified.

Response: Thank you for this comment. The specific medium-chain triglyceride used in this study has been specified in the Materials section.

Pg 7, line 54: the final volume is lower than the initial volume of water, so ethanol and water must be removed.

Response: Thank you for this observation. The methodology has been revised to clarify that both ethanol and excess water were removed under reduced pressure to obtain the final formulation volume. This information has been included in the revised manuscript.

Pg 8, line 16: since you dilute the sample to analyse in the DLS, how do you guarantee that the increase in water does not impact the final volume of the sample? I suggest you characterize the sample using a methodology that does not require such dilution, such as Cryo-TEM or SAXS.

Response: Thank you for this important comment. Although dilution is required for DLS measurements, this is a standard and widely accepted procedure to minimize multiple scattering effects without significantly altering droplet size when appropriate dilution factors are used [Bhattacharjee, 2016; McClements, 2012]. In this study, a low dilution ratio (1:10, v/v) was applied, which is commonly reported for nanoemulsion systems. Moreover, DLS is a well-established technique for determining hydrodynamic diameter and polydispersity index, providing reliable information on size distribution and colloidal stability [Kumar, 2017]. Considering the scope of this study, DLS was considered an appropriate method for physicochemical characterization.

Pg 11, line 16: “All assays were performed in triplicate The 50% cytotoxic concentration (CC50)”. It is missing a dot between the words “triplicate” and “The”.

Response: Thank you for pointing this out. The sentence has been corrected in the revised manuscript.

An experiment to evaluate how much RSV and BCP are encapsulated and the quality of these components is important to ensure that the results are due to the drug and not to degradation products that may occur during the process.

Response: Thank you for this important comment. We agree that the evaluation of encapsulation efficiency is relevant for a comprehensive characterization. However, the primary objective of this study was to assess the biological activity of the nanoemulsions, particularly their antiviral and cytotoxic effects.

Given the lipophilic nature of RSV and BCP, their incorporation into the oil phase of nanoemulsions is expected and has been widely reported in the literature, with high incorporation efficiency typically observed for similar compounds [1–3]. Additionally, nanoemulsion systems have been extensively described as suitable carriers for improving the stability and delivery of lipophilic bioactives such as resveratrol [4].

Furthermore, the consistent physicochemical properties observed (particle size, PDI, and zeta potential), together with the biological results obtained, support the effective incorporation of the compounds in the developed systems.

Donsì F, Sessa M, Mediouni H, Mgaidi A, Ferrari G. Encapsulation of bioactive compounds in nanoemulsion- based delivery systems. Procedia Food Sci. 2011;1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profoo.2011.09.246

Gupta A, Eral HB, Hatton TA, Doyle PS. Controlling and predicting droplet size of nanoemulsions: Scaling relations with experimental validation. Soft Matter. 2016;12. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5sm02051d

Santos Porto D, da Costa Bernardo Port B, Conte J, Fretes Argenta D, Pereira Balleste M, Amadeu Micke G, et al. Development of ophthalmic nanoemulsions of β-caryophyllene for the treatment of Acanthamoeba keratitis. Int J Pharm. Elsevier B.V.; 2024;659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124252

R. Neves A, Lucio M, L.C. Lima J, Reis S. Resveratrol in Medicinal Chemistry: A Critical Review of its Pharmacokinetics, Drug-Delivery, and Membrane Interactions. Curr Med Chem. 2012;19. https://doi.org/10.2174/092986712799945085

Results:

Pg 12, line 35: After the sentence, write (data not shown).

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. It has been added in the revised manuscript.

Pg. 12, line 37: In the first paragraph of item 3.3, the results are described, but no figure or table presenting them is shown. Therefore, I suggest including a figure with graphs in the paper to better illustrate the results, especially the comparison between the nanoformulation and the free drug. This is important because some conclusions are unsupported by the paper, and it is unclear how the doses used in the antiviral test were selected.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. A new table (Table III) has been created presenting the CCy0 values together with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI9y%), allowing a clear and direct comparison between the nanoformulations and the free compounds. Based on the CCy0 values obtained, a preliminary antiviral assay was performed using concentrations below the cytotoxic threshold. Subsequently, the concentrations used in the antiviral assays presented in the manuscript were defined according to the results of this preliminary screening.

Pg 13: Figures 2 and 3 could have clearer legends with more details on how the statistics are calculated and whether the graphs show standard deviation or standard error. Also, the resolution of the figures is low.

Response: Thank you for this comment. The legends of figures 2 and 3 have been revised to include more detailed descriptions of the experimental model, including the cell line, viral assay (plaque reduction assay), and data interpretation. The legends now clearly indicate how the data are expressed and include the number of replicates and variability (mean ± standard deviation). As these figures represent dose–response antiviral activity profiles, no inferential statistical analysis was applied. In addition, the figures have been improved in terms of resolution and readability in the revised manuscript.

Pg13: The chosen doses for the antiviral activity are not well explained, since they are much lower than the IC50 in the VERO cells.

Response: Thank you for this comment. The concentrations used in the antiviral assays were selected based on the CCy0 values in VERO cells, ensuring that only non-cytotoxic concentrations were tested. This approach is essential to distinguish true antiviral effects from cytotoxicity. The ICy0 values were determined from the concentration–response curves obtained within this non-cytotoxic range.

Pg 13, line 38: The first paragraph of the item 3.4 Wound-healing assay and UV protection capacity” are discussion and not results.

Response: The reviewer is correct in this observation. The first paragraph of section 3.4 included interpretative aspects that are more suitable for the discussion section. Accordingly, this paragraph has been removed from the results section and the corresponding considerations have been incorporated into the discussion.

Pg. 14, line 16: I suggest including the CC50 value for VERO in Table III to make comparisons easier. In the table, it is important to include the µM symbol, not only in the legend.

The cytotoxicity results in HGF are not presented. These data are essential because they guide the dose selection for subsequent experiments.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. The µM unit has now been added directly to the cytotoxicity values presented in the tables to improve clarity. In addition, a new table (Table III) has been created to present the CCy0 values for VERO cells, allowing a clearer comparison between free compounds and nanoformulations. The cytotoxicity results in HGF cells are now fully presented in Table IV, and the standard deviation (SD) values have been included in Tables III, IV, V, and VI to better represent data variability.

Pg 14, line 28: The data are not shown in figures or tables. Therefore, it is not possible to evaluate. Also, it would be nice to have optical microscopy images for the scratch assay.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important comment. We would like to clarify that the observations described in this section correspond to preliminary experiments performed using concentrations selected based on the antiviral activity results (0.98 µM NE RSV and 238.00 µM NE BCP). In these initial conditions, treatment with NE BCP and NE RSV+BCP resulted in a pronounced loss of cell adhesion, which prevented quantitative analysis of wound closure. Therefore, no numerical data are presented for these groups, and the results are described qualitatively as an indication of impaired cell adhesion and migration. In contrast, this effect was not observed for NE RSV, for which cell adhesion was preserved, allowing quantitative evaluation of wound closure, and the corresponding values are presented in the text.

Pg 14, line 44: The results shown in Figure 5 are contrary to the sentence.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this careful observation. We acknowledge that, in figure 5, the highest concentration of NE RSV (40 µM) showed a statistically significant difference compared to the untreated control. However, this difference corresponds to a lower wound closure percentage relative to the control, indicating no enhancement of the healing process. Since this experiment aimed to evaluate the potential of the nanoemulsions to promote wound healing, this effect was not interpreted as a positive outcome.

Importantly, no statistically significant differences were observed between the different concentrations tested for either NE RSV or NE BCP. Therefore, the conclusion that the nanoemulsions did not promote wound healing within the tested concentration range remains valid.

Pg 15, line 26: In the title of Table IV, describe the dose used for the material in the test.

Since there was a detachment of the cell treated with NE BCP and NE BCP+RSV but not in the NE RSV, it would be important to repeat this experiment using blank NE and Free drug BCP to observe if this happens because of the BCP dose or because of the NE.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this valuable suggestion. The title of Table V has been revised to explicitly include the concentrations of the tested formulations, as requested.

In addition, we would like to clarify that the blank nanoemulsion (NE blank) was evaluated under the same experimental conditions, and cell viability values remained comparable to those of the untreated control group, indicating that the nanoemulsion system itself did not induce loss of cell viability or adhesion.

Therefore, the pronounced loss of cell adhesion observed for NE BCP and NE RSV+BCP is likely associated with the presence and concentration of β-caryophyllene rather than the nanoemulsion system itself.

Pg15, line 18: The results for the NE RSV+BCP are not shown for these tests. Why did the authors choose not to test them?

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. NE RSV+BCP was initially evaluated under UV exposure conditions; however, no improvement in cell viability was observed under these conditions.

Based on these observations, additional assays were designed to investigate whether different concentration ranges of the individual nanoemulsions (NE RSV and NE BCP) could improve cell viability under UV exposure. However, no beneficial effects were observed for either formulation.

Therefore, the combined formulation (NE RSV+BCP) was not further evaluated in these subsequent assays, as the individual components did not demonstrate improved performance.

Discuss:

Pg 16, lines 9: The value of the Zeta potential of the NE Blank are type different from the one described in Table II.

Response: We thank the reviewer for carefully identifying this inconsistency. The difference between the zeta potential value reported in the Discussion section and that presented in Table II resulted from an inconsistency in the text. The correct value for the zeta potential of the NE Blank is −19.70 ± 3.37 mV, as shown in Table II.

Pg 16, line 14: It is important to cite supporting literature for the group hypothesis. Therefore, I suggest the addition of a literature reference in the first paragraph of the discussion. Here are some suggestions: Hemlata et al. (2025) – doi: 10.1093/biomethods/bpaf066.; Muntimadugu et al. (2022) – doi: 10.3390/ijms23074034; Guo et al. (2021) – doi: 10.3390/nano11051293.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. Supporting references have now been added to the first paragraph of the Discussion to substantiate the proposed hypothesis, without altering the original interpretation of the results. These references support the relationship between particle size distribution and colloidal stability, as well as the role of surface charge and interfacial interactions in lipid-based nanosystems.

Pg 16, line 39: The dose of RSV reported in the literature cited in this work is higher than the dose used for the cell viability study. Therefore, it is unclear why the dose range of 0.03-15.63 µM was chosen for the study of cell viability.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important observation. The concentration range used for RSV (0.03–15.63 µM) was selected based on preliminary experiments aimed at identifying non-cytotoxic concentrations suitable for subsequent antiviral assays. Since the main objective of this study was to evaluate antiviral activity under biologically relevant and non-toxic conditions, the selected range ensured cell viability above 75%, avoiding confounding effects related to cytotoxicity. Additionally, this concentration range was defined considering its use in the RSV+BCP combination, in which the compounds were evaluated at a fixed ratio, ensuring that both could be tested simultaneously within a non-cytotoxic and comparable concentration window.

Pg. 17, line 24: Since this work did not study the mechanism of action of the drugs BCP and RSV on the viruses, it is important that the appropriate literature be cited in this paragraph.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. Appropriate literature describing the antiviral mechanisms of RSV and BCP has been added to this paragraph.

Pg 18, line 6: Again, the appropriate literature should be cited.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. Appropriate literature supporting the interpretation of the combinatorial effect has been added to this sentence.

Pg 18, line 12: No statistical difference was observed in the NE RSV when compared to the control group in 24h at the wound healing studies. Therefore, this slight increase is insignificant.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. The manuscript has been revised to clarify that no statistically significant difference was observed for NE RSV compared to the control group at 24 h, and the interpretation of a potential effect has been removed.

Pg 18, line 42: Since the work of KK, Aathira et al (2024) is in silico and does not evaluate the nanoparticle of BCP, only free BCP, the comparison with the group work should be done carefully.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. We agree that the study by KK, Aathira et al. (2024) evaluates the effects of free β-caryophyllene, whereas our work investigates nanoencapsulated BCP. Therefore, the comparison should be interpreted with caution.

The manuscript has been revised to clarify this distinction and to avoid direct comparison between free and nanoencapsulated forms, emphasizing the differences in formulation and their potential impact on biological responses.

Pg 20, line 39. “…contrasts with studies demonstrating significant biological activities of this compound..” cite the studies.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. Appropriate references supporting the biological activity of β-caryophyllene have been added to this sentence.

In the discussion section, an explanation should be added on why different methodologies of evaluation of citizenship were used. Because the methodologies for HGF and VERO differ, it is not possible to compare the results.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important comment. The use of different cytotoxicity assays was based on the specific characteristics of each cell line. The sulforhodamine B (SRB) assay was used for VERO cells, while the MTT assay was employed for HGF cells, as these methodologies are well established and routinely used for these respective cell lines in our research group.

Each assay was applied consistently within its respective experimental model, and the results were interpreted independently. No direct comparison between VERO and HGF data was intended in the manuscript.

It should also include an explanation of why the selected RSV doses for wound closure were 10, 20, and 40 µm. Also, the results for these experiments

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. The concentrations of NE RSV (10, 20, and 40 µM) used in the wound-healing assay were selected following the same rationale applied in the UV protection experiments. Since no significant effect was observed at the antiviral concentration, higher concentrations of RSV were tested to investigate whether increased doses could promote wound healing activity.

EDITOR COMMENTS:

The authors must substantively address the main points raised by Reviewer 2 regarding the methodology and experimental design.

Response: We thank the editor for the valuable comments. The points raised regarding the methodology and experimental design have been carefully addressed and revised throughout the manuscript.

In Table III, it is necessary to correct the CC50 value (1.37 + 335.2) of the “NE RSV+BCP” condition. Furthermore, as requested by Reviewers 1 and 2, all tables must contain the mean and standard deviation, as well as the number of experiments performed.

“Figure 2. Effect of the RSV, BCP and RSV+BCP on HSfV-1 (KOS strain) in VERO cells (n=3) deviation”. As requested by Reviewer 2, this figure must contain the mean and standard deviation.

Response: We thank the editor for this comment. Figure 2 has been revised to include the mean values and their corresponding standard deviations, as requested.

“and the RSV+BCP combination was tested at the same concentrations in a fixed ratio (1:244).” Why was the combination used at that specific concentration? This should be clear to the readers.

Response: We thank the editor for this important comment. The fixed ratio (1:244) between RSV and BCP was defined based on the formulation design used in this study. The concentration of BCP was selected according to Santos Porto et al. (2024), in which a concentration of 5.0% was used. In our formulation, BCP was incorporated at 5% to ensure adequate loading in the nanoemulsion system.

For RSV, a working concentration of 500 µM was selected based on its biological activity range. To maintain these target concentrations, the nanoemulsion was prepared containing 5% BCP and 1000 µM RSV (corresponding to 0.02%), resulting in a fixed ratio of 1:244.

This ratio reflects the proportion of both compounds within the formulation and was maintained throughout the experiments to ensure consistency in the evaluation of their combined effects.

The authors use “min” and “minutes”, for example in “for 30 min” and “ 50 mJ/cm² for 30 minutes”. The authors should standardize this throughout the manuscript. The same applies to “hours” and “h”. Standardization is necessary.

Response: We thank the editor for this comment. The manuscript has been revised to standardize the use of time units throughout the text.

The abbreviation and company name for fetal bovine serum should be used first in “and supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (Gibco).” Afterwards, use only the abbreviation.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. The manuscript has been revised to introduce fetal bovine serum with its full name and abbreviation at first mention, and to use only the abbreviation (FBS) thereafter.

The citation format throughout the manuscript needs to be modified. Please remove the year of publication from all ‘et al.’ citations, particularly in the Materials and Methods and Discussion sections, to adhere to the journal’s formatting guidelines.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. The citation format has been revised accordingly throughout the manuscript.

Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz.

REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS

Anonymous

REVIEWER #1

The manuscript by Dai Prá et al., entitled “NANOEMULSIONS LOADED WITH β-CARYOPHYLLENE AND RESVERATROL FOR HERPES INFECTIONS,” presents a study evaluating potential therapies for herpes infections.

The authors addressed all of the questions raised; however, some of the points discussed still give rise to concerns.

Introduction

Pg 4, line 59: Although the reference is very good, the cited article (9) does not mention the use of plant-based compounds as anti-herpetic agents, as stated in the sentence.

Pg 5, line 22: I suggest adding a paragraph beginning with “Both natural compounds...” and merging it with the following paragraph, “Their ability to aid...”

Pg 5, line 38: I believe there is a typo in the word “wate.” I think it should be “water.”

Methodology:

Pg 8, line 36: An experiment to evaluate the extent of RSV and BCP encapsulation, as well as the integrity of these components, is important to ensure that the results are attributable to the drugs themselves rather than to degradation products that may arise during the process. The authors’ response to this point is not satisfactory. Although the methodology used for BCP production is the same as that described in the literature by Santos Porto et al., no study has used the same components at the same concentrations for RSV. Therefore, because the materials that compose the oils vary, the efficiency of their interactions with the components may also vary. In addition, the nanoformulation containing both components may affect encapsulation efficiency. For this reason, it is necessary to conduct a study quantifying encapsulation efficiency and drug content, including to ensure that the doses tested in the cytotoxicity studies correspond to the doses actually administered. Therefore, I strongly recommend conducting a quantification experiment to determine the actual doses.

Results:

Pg 13: The rationale for the doses selected for the antiviral activity assays is not well explained, since they are much lower than the IC₅₀ values in VERO cells.

Response: Thank you for this comment. The concentrations used in the antiviral assays were selected based on the CC₅₀ values in VERO cells, ensuring that only non-cytotoxic concentrations were tested. This approach is essential to distinguish true antiviral effects from cytotoxicity. The IC₅₀ values were determined from the concentration–response curves obtained within this non-cytotoxic range.

I suggest that the curves used for the calculation of the IC₅₀ in cells be shown, perhaps in the supplementary material. I also strongly recommend that, for each compound tested, a dose–response curve be obtained in which at least one concentration produces more than 50% inhibition.

Pg 14, line 2: Although the response states that the reduced wound closure observed at the 40 µM dose of NE RSV demonstrates the absence of a healing effect, a statistically significant difference is present. Therefore, as the manuscript is currently written, it cannot be stated that no statistically significant difference was found, because such a difference does exist. Moreover, the observed reduction in wound closure may suggest that, at this concentration, the healing process is delayed and that it is negatively affected. For this reason, I suggest that these data be analyzed in greater detail.

Pg 15, line 26: In the title of Table IV, please specify the dose of the material used in the test. Since cell detachment was observed in the groups treated with NE BCP and NE BCP+RSV, but not in the NE RSV group, it would be important to repeat this experiment using blank NE and free BCP to determine whether this effect is due to the BCP dose or to the nanoemulsion itself.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this valuable suggestion. The title of Table V has been revised to explicitly include the concentrations of the tested formulations, as requested.

In addition, we would like to clarify that the blank nanoemulsion (NE blank) was evaluated under the same experimental conditions, and cell viability values remained comparable to those of the untreated control group, indicating that the nanoemulsion system itself did not induce loss of cell viability or adhesion.

Therefore, the pronounced loss of cell adhesion observed for NE BCP and NE SV+BCP is likely associated with the presence and concentration of β-caryophyllene rather than the nanoemulsion system itself.

I would like to see the results for the blank nanoparticle, as well as the images acquired for all experimental conditions.

Pg 15, line 18: The results for NE RSV+BCP are not shown for these tests. Why did the authors choose not to evaluate this formulation?

Response: We thank the reviewer for this comment. NE RSV+BCP was initially evaluated under UV exposure conditions; however, no improvement in cell viability was observed under these conditions.

Based on these observations, additional assays were designed to investigate whether different concentration ranges of the individual nanoemulsions (NE RSV and NE BCP) could improve cell viability under UV exposure. However, no beneficial effects were observed for either formulation.

Therefore, the combined formulation (NE RSV+BCP) was not further evaluated in these subsequent assays, as the individual components did not demonstrate improved performance.

This justification should be incorporated into the manuscript.

REVIEWER #2

No comments.

AUTHORS’ RESPONSE TO THE REVIEWERS

The Editorial Office

Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz

Dear Editor,

Thank you very much for your interest in our manuscript ID MIOC-2025 0333.R1 “Nanoemulsions loaded with β-caryophyllene and resveratrol for herpes infections”.

We are very grateful for the comments and suggestions of the reviewers and we have revised our manuscript accordingly. The improvements and comments are described below in a detailed point-by-point response.

We thank you and the reviewers for the critical and valuable comments. We believe that they have helped us to improve the manuscript substantially and we hope that the manuscript is now acceptable for publication in Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz.

Sincerely yours,

Professor Izabella Thaís Silva, PhD

Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz.

REVIEWERS’ COMMENTS

Anonymous

REVIEWER #1

No comments.

REVIEWER #2

No comments.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Supplementary material

    Data Availability Statement

    After publication the data will be available on demand to corresponding author.


    Articles from Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz are provided here courtesy of Instituto Oswaldo Cruz

    RESOURCES